There are many foods that can trigger headaches and migraines. Not only can specific foods trigger a headache, but dietary habits can also play a role. Fasting, dehydration, or skipping meals may also cause headaches. By tracking your headache episodes through your headache diary, you may be able to identify specific foods that trigger your headaches.

Published surveys have found that the most commonly reported food triggers are cheese, chocolate, alcohol, bananas, and citrus fruit.

Most symptoms of Food Additive-Induced Headaches begin within 20-25 minutes after consuming these products. They include:

• Pressure in the chest• Tightening and pressure in the face• Burning sensation in the chest, neck, or shoulders• Facial flushing• Dizziness• Headache pain across the front or sides of the head• Abdominal discomfort

Obama outlines rebuilding plans to create jobs

WASHINGTON – President-electBarack Obama on Saturday outlined his plan to create 2.5 million jobs in coming years to rebuild roads and bridges and modernize schools while developing alternative energy sources and more efficient cars.

"These aren't just steps to pull ourselves out of this immediate crisis; these are the long-term investments in our economic future that have been ignored for far too long," Obama said in the weekly Democratic radio address. The economic recovery plan being developed by his staff aims to create 2.5 million jobs by January 2011, and he wants to get it through Congress quickly and sign it soon after taking office.

He called the plan "big enough to meet the challenges we face" and said that it will jump-start job creation but also "lay the foundation for a strong and growing economy."

Aides said the economic plan outlined Saturday went further that the president-elect has gone before.

A trio of crises — housing, credit and financial — have badly damaged the economy, and financial analysts have projected the country's economic hardships will continue through much of 2009.

Obama acknowledged Saturday that evidence is growing the country is "facing an economic crisis of historic proportions." He noted turmoil on Wall Street, a decrease in new home purchases, growing jobless claims and the menacing problem of deflation.

He said he was pleased Congress passed an extension of unemployment benefits this week, but added, "We must do more to put people back to work and get our economy moving again."

Figures out this week showed new claims for jobless aid had reached a 16-year high. "If we don't act swiftly and boldly, most experts now believe that we could lose millions of jobs next year," Obama said.

He cautioned, "There are no quick or easy fixes to this crisis, which has been many years in the making, and it's likely to get worse before it gets better." But Obama said Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, "is our chance to begin anew."

Obama said getting congressional approval for his broad economic plan will not be easy.

"I will need and seek support from Republicans and Democrats, and I'll be welcome to ideas and suggestions from both sides of the aisle," he said. "But what is not negotiable is the need for immediate action."

Across the country, Americans "are lying awake at night wondering if next week's paycheck will cover next month's bills," people are showing up at work to clear out their desks and retirees are watching their life savings disappear, Obama said.

On Thursday, the Labor Department reported that claims for unemployment benefits jumped last week to 542,000. That marked the highest level since July 1992 and provided fresh evidence of a rapidly weakening job market that is expected to get even worse next year.

In this country's darkest hours, the American people have risen above their divisions to solve their problems, he said.

"We have acted boldly, bravely, and above all, together," Obama said. "That is the chance our new beginning now offers us, and that is the challenge we must rise to in the days to come. It is time to act. As the next president of the United States, I will."

Friday, November 21, 2008

Everyone’s talking about a new New Deal, for obvious reasons. In 2008, as in 1932, a long era of Republican political dominance came to an end in the face of an economic and financial crisis that, in voters’ minds, both discredited the G.O.P.’s free-market ideology and undermined its claims of competence. And for those on the progressive side of the political spectrum, these are hopeful times.

There is, however, another and more disturbing parallel between 2008 and 1932 — namely, the emergence of a power vacuum at the height of the crisis. The interregnum of 1932-1933, the long stretch between the election and the actual transfer of power, was disastrous for the U.S. economy, at least in part because the outgoing administration had no credibility, the incoming administration had no authority and the ideological chasm between the two sides was too great to allow concerted action. And the same thing is happening now.

It’s true that the interregnum will be shorter this time: F.D.R. wasn’t inaugurated until March; Barack Obama will move into the White House on Jan. 20. But crises move faster these days.

How much can go wrong in the two months before Mr. Obama takes the oath of office? The answer, unfortunately, is: a lot. Consider how much darker the economic picture has grown since the failure of Lehman Brothers, which took place just over two months ago. And the pace of deterioration seems to be accelerating.

Most obviously, we’re in the midst of the worst stock market crash since the Great Depression: the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index has now fallen more than 50 percent from its peak. Other indicators are arguably even more disturbing: unemployment claims are surging, manufacturing production is plunging, interest rates on corporate bonds — which reflect investor fears of default — are soaring, which will almost surely lead to a sharp fall in business spending. The prospects for the economy look much grimmer now than they did as little as a week or two ago.

Yet economic policy, rather than responding to the threat, seems to have gone on vacation. In particular, panic has returned to the credit markets, yet no new rescue plan is in sight. On the contrary, Henry Paulson, the Treasury secretary, has announced that he won’t even go back to Congress for the second half of the $700 billion already approved for financial bailouts. And financial aid for the beleaguered auto industry is being stalled by a political standoff.

How much should we worry about what looks like two months of policy drift? At minimum, the next two months will inflict serious pain on hundreds of thousands of Americans, who will lose their jobs, their homes, or both. What’s really troubling, however, is the possibility that some of the damage being done right now will be irreversible. I’m concerned, in particular, about the two D’s: deflation and Detroit.

About deflation: Japan’s “lost decade” in the 1990s taught economists that it’s very hard to get the economy moving once expectations of inflation get too low (it doesn’t matter whether people literally expect prices to fall). Yet there’s clear deflationary pressure on the U.S. economy right now, and every month that passes without signs of recovery increases the odds that we’ll find ourselves stuck in a Japan-type trap for years.

About Detroit: There’s now a real risk that, in the absence of quick federal aid, the Big Three automakers and their network of suppliers will be forced into liquidation — that is, forced to shut down, lay off all their workers and sell off their assets. And if that happens, it will be very hard to bring them back.

Now, maybe letting the auto companies die is the right decision, even though an auto industry collapse would be a huge blow to an already slumping economy. But it’s a decision that should be taken carefully, with full consideration of the costs and benefits — not a decision taken by default, because of a political standoff between Democrats who want Mr. Paulson to use some of that $700 billion and a lame-duck administration that’s trying to force Congress to divert funds from a fuel-efficiency program instead.

Is economic policy completely paralyzed between now and Jan. 20? No, not completely. Some useful actions are being taken. For example, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the lending agencies, have taken the helpful step of declaring a temporary halt to foreclosures, while Congress has passed a badly needed extension of unemployment benefits now that the White House has dropped its opposition.

But nothing is happening on the policy front that is remotely commensurate with the scale of the economic crisis. And it’s scary to think how much more can go wrong before Inauguration Day.

Another excitotoxin that is strongly linked to migraines is aspartame. Again, similar to MSG, Aspartame is a poison:

Aspartame - An Intense Source Of Excitotoxins

Aspartame is a sweetener made from two amino acids, phenylalanine and the excitotoxin aspartate. It should be avoided at all costs. Aspartame complaints accounts for approximately 70% of ALL complaints to the FDA. It is implicated in everything from blindness to headaches to convulsions. Sold under dozens of brand names such as NutraSweet and Equal, aspartame breaks down within 20 minutes at room temperature into several primary toxic and dangerous ingredients:

1. DKP (diketopiperazine) (When ingested, converts to a near duplicate of

I have been a migraine sufferer for over 15 years. The disease lands me in bed for hours, even days with cold packs over my eyes. I must have the lights off, and no sound. The slightest sound makes me want to crawl out of my skin. Bright lights make me want to tear my eyeballs out, and smells make me physically want to throw up.

Most days I try to "buck up" and get through it, but lately, that has been becoming more an more difficult to do. After a terribly bad spell last week I went to refill my Imitrex prescription only to be told it would cost me $220. I can not afford $220 for 9 tablets. That is insane! And the meds only work for me some of the time. Often, I am taking 3-4 pills per episode. I suffer from migraines every 3-5 weeks or so with varying degrees of severity and functionability.

Migraine is disease, a headache is only a symptom - A MIGRAINE IS NOT JUST A BAD HEADACHE. Migraine pain is caused by vasodilation in the cranial blood vessels (expansion of the blood vessels), while headache pain is caused by vasoconstriction (narrowing of the blood vessels). During a migraine, inflammation of the tissue surrounding the brain, i.e., neurogenic inflammation, exacerbates the pain.

Unlike a headache, the Migraine disease has many symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, auras (light spots), sensitivity to light and sound, numbness, difficulty in speech, and severe semihemispherical head pain. One Migraine attack alone can last for eight hours, several days, or even weeks.

MIGRAINE IS A DISEASE, A HEADACHE IS ONLY A SYMPTOM.

A Migraine is induced by various controllable and uncontrollable triggers. Uncontrollable triggers include weather patterns and menstrual cycles, and controllable triggers include bright light, MSG, aspartame, and alcohol. The severity and frequency of Migraines for one person depends upon how many triggers an individual must experience before a Migraine is induced. The combination of triggers is different for each person.

Remember, Migraine is a disease that involves a heightening of one's senses, all of one's senses. A Migraineur is more sensitive to his or her surroundings, including light, sound, smells, taste (chemicals in foods), and touch (including the touch of the atmospheric pressure on one's body). Awareness of one's environment is critical for a Migraineur.

I have begun tracking my migraines in hopes to link them to direct triggers. Since I can not afford the medication prescribed to me, I can at least try to prevent the attacks from occuring. While many of my migraines seem unrelated to events around me, I have been able to directly link them to MSG (monosodium glutemate). I am in the process of trying to remove MSG from my diet entirely. It is beginning to look like I am now only going to be able to eat fresh fruits and vegetables and organic meats. I don't think I can eat at the work cafeteria, or certainly not fast food - maybe not even sit down restaraunts.

MSG is in EVERYTHING! There is no clear labeling of foods to indicate MSG is included as it has 15 different names, and is also included in more than 30 other ingredients!!!!

HIDDEN SOURCES OF PROCESSED FREE GLUTAMAIC ACID (MSG):

INGREDIENTS THAT SERVE AS COMMON MSG-REACTION TRIGGERS

The MSG-reaction is a reaction to free glutamic acid that occurs in food as a consequence of manufacture or fermentation. MSG-sensitive people do not react to protein (which contains bound glutamic acid) or any of the minute amounts of free glutamic acid that might be found in unadulterated, unfermented, food.

The not so new game is to label hydrolyzed proteins as pea protein, whey protein, corn protein, wheat protein, soy protein, etc. If a pea, for example, were whole, it would be identified as a pea. In “pea protein,” the pea has been hydrolyzed, at least in part, producing processed free glutamic acid (MSG).

Disodium guanylate and disodium inosinate are expensive food additives that work synergistically with inexpensive MSG. Their use suggests that the product has MSG in it. They would probably not be used as food additives if there were no MSG present.

MSG reactions have been reported to soaps, shampoos, hair conditioners, and cosmetics, where MSG is hidden in ingredients that include the words "hydrolyzed," "amino acids," and "protein."

MSG reactions have been reported from produce (especially very large potatoes) fertilized and/or sprayed with MSG-containing products. Low fat and no fat milk products often include milk solids that contain MSG. Low fat and no fat versions of ice cream and cheese may not be as obvious as yogurt, milk, cream, cream cheese, cottage cheese, etc., but they are not an exception.

Drinks, candy, and chewing gum are potential sources of hidden MSG and of aspartame and/or neotame. Aspartic acid, found in neotame and aspartame (NutraSweet), ordinarily causes MSG type reactions in MSG sensitive people. Aspartame is found in some medications, including children's medications. Neotame is relatively new and we have not yet seen it used widely. Check with your pharmacist.

Binders and fillers for medications, nutrients, and supplements, both prescription and non-prescription, enteral feeding materials, and some fluids administered intravenously in hospitals, may contain MSG. According to the manufacturer, Varivax–Merck chicken pox vaccine (Varicella Virus Live), contains L-monosodium glutamate and hydrolyzed gelatin both of which contain processed free glutamic acid (MSG) which causes brain lesions in young laboratory animals, and causes endocrine disturbances like OBESITY and REPRODUCTIVE disorders later in life. It would appear that most, if not all, live virus vaccines contain MSG.

Some people react to even very small amounts of MSG. MSG-induced reactions may occur immediately after ingestion or after as much as 48 hours.

By FDA definition, all MSG is "naturally occurring." "Natural" doesn't mean "safe." "Natural" only means that the ingredient started out in nature.

Processed free glutamic acid (MSG) is a toxic substance. A reaction to MSG is a reaction to a toxin/poison. A reaction to MSG is not an allergic reaction. Traditional "allergy tests" will not identify people who are sensitive to a toxin/poison.

KNOW THIS:

The ingredient that causes MSG reactions in MSG-sensitive people ismanufactured/processed free glutamic acid.(1) Manufactured/processed free glutamic acid is found in processed foods (9) -- but it is not found in unprocessed or unadulterated meat, fish, or vegetables (including soybeans, mushrooms, and tomatoes.).(3)Only meat, fish, or vegetables that have been subjected to some sort of manufacturing or fermenting process will cause MSG reactions in MSG-sensitive people who ingest amounts that exceed their tolerances for MSG.(1) Dairy products, also, may cause MSG reactions in MSG-sensitive people because some dairy products are ultra-pasteurized, some are fermented, and many contain food additives such as carrageenan that are problematic for MSG-sensitive people.(1) All manufactured/processed free glutamic acid contains contaminants (D-glutamic acid, pyroglutamic acid, and others) (12,13), while the glutamic acid found in intact/unadulterated protein contains no contaminants.(3) Some manufactured/processed free glutamic acid contains carcinogenic mono and dichloro propanols.(12)

KNOW THIS:

With one exception, aspartame and processed free glutamic acid (MSG) cause identical adverse reactions in people who are sensitive to them.(2) In addition, the free glutamic acid found in MSG and the free aspartic acid found in aspartame both have been shown to kill brain cells and cause subsequent endocrine disorders in laboratory animals.(4) (We don't do such experiments on humans.)

When a manufacturer tells you there is no processed free glutamic acid in a product that made you ill, ask the manufacturer to back up his claim by providing you with a "free amino acid" assay. If there is any free glutamic acid found, you can assume that the product contains MSG.

When a manufacturer tells you that any MSG in his product couldn't possibly harm you because it is "naturally occurring," inform the manufacturer that both arsenic and hydrochloric acid are "naturally occurring," too.

For any questions regarding this event, visithttp://www.ecycleIT mn.com or call Mikaela Kramer (651) 635-0211.* No home or kitchen appliances such as microwaves, vacuum cleaners,toaster ovens, etc. will be accepted.*We cannot accept hazardous waste materials such at motor oil, paint,acetate, turpentine, etc.*Ecycle IT, Inc. is not responsible for the destruction of your data.Please be sure to remove any and all data from your unit before donating.

used a racial epithet to insult Barack Obama in a message posted Wednesday, describing the president-elect in demeaning terms that imply he does the bidding of whites.

Zawahiri also challenged Obama's policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan saying

Be aware that the dogs of Afghanistan have found the flesh of your soldiers to be delicious, so send thousands after thousands to them

The press is reporting this as Al Qaeda's first direct challenge to Obama. But what does it actually say about Al Qaeda? More than anything it demonstrates that Al Qaeda is genuinely concerned about an Obama presidency and views it as a strategic threat to its existence.

First and foremost, Al Qaeda is an organization that thrives on propaganda. It paints the United States as an evil empire that oppresses its own minorities and has little regard for the rest of the world. Al Qaeda uses these types of narratives to raise funds and recruit. The Bush administration played right into this trap. Its "with us or against us" mentality and invasion of Iraq damaged America's image around the world and reinforced Al Qaeda's narrative.

But Al Qaeda's narrative is now under siege and it's clearly uncertain about how to react. The election of the first African American President, one with a Muslim father, flies in the face of this narrative. It shows America as an open and tolerant society - not the oppressive empire Al Qaeda would like to portray. In fact, the overwhelminglypositiveinternational reaction to Obama's election is proof of the the threat Al Qaeda faces. As a 29 year old at a Bangkok Starbucks explained,

What an inspiration. He is the first truly global US president the world has ever had. He had an Asian childhood, African parentage and has a Middle Eastern name. He is a truly global president.

Thus, it's not surprising that Zawahiri has resorted to calling Obama a "house negro" to try and paint him as just another American President. But this is clearly more a defensive and weak message than effective propaganda that might actually work.

Moreover, Zawahiri's message about Afghanistan and Pakistan portrays a certain level of nervousness over an administration that is actually going to go after the real terrorist haven on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. Al Qaeda viewed the invasion of Iraq as a positive creating a recruiting and training ground for terrorists. As a 2006 National Intelligence Estimate explained (PDF)

The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.

Now, the U.S. is once again focused on the area of the world that the Intelligence Community agrees represents the most the direct threat to the homeland. It is the area of the world, which was the source of the 9/11 attacks and has been the source of just about every other major plot against a Western target over the past few years. This should raise some serious concerns for Al Qaeda's central leadership - especially since most of them are in fact believed to be hiding in the Pakistan-Afghanistan borderlands.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) ― Allegations have surfaced of voter irregularities involving a paid staffer of Sen. Norm Coleman, and the ramifications could have a profound effect on the outcome of Coleman's race against Al Franken.

A reporter for the Minnesota Independent, a progressive online publication, was working on a story about voter turnout when she overheard that Republican poll challengers monitoring voting at the precinct had brought in Mahamoud Wardere to help voters translate.

The Coleman campaign confirmed that Wardere is a paid member of their staff.

"I made some calls, found out his name and I confronted him and I said, 'Are you Wardare?' And he said, 'Yes, I am,'" said Priesmeyer. "At that poin I said, 'Are you working for Norm Coleman's campaign?' And he said, 'No, I am on vacation today.'"

However, Priesmeyer said voters told her that translators were telling them to vote for Coleman.

"I had already spoken to at least three people who told me that translators were telling them to vote for Norm Coleman," she said.

The issue could end up being the basis of a legal challenge. According to Prof. Joe Daly of Hamline University, state election law has a provision that if there is a deliberate, serious or material violation of state election law, a district court judge must gather the evidence and present it to the presiding officer of the U.S. Senate, who would then decide the merits of the allegations.

The Senate could even revoke the results of the election and decide who would be seated as senator.

The Somali Justice Advocacy Center says they have gotten complaints about Wardare urging voters to vote for Coleman. But Omar Jamal says he has also gotten complaints of voters being pressured to vote for Franken, admitting he had heard complaints centering on both candidates.

Cullen Sheehan, campaign manager for Coleman, said Wardare was working at the polls but he was taking a day off from the campaign, he did nothing inappropriate and he was merely working as an interpreter.

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

America has spoken, and spoken we have! With record voter turnout the country has voted on Hope rather than Fear. A new era of re-pair and re-connection has begun. We the people can do this together, but we must not become complacent. We need to remain vigilant. . . Follow the issues, keep in touch with your elected officials. We can not sit back and watch the ride, if anything has taught us that it has been the past 8 years.

Let us all re-connect with each other, and begin to heal not only the divide between us, but also any wounds we have received, or given. Reach out to one another, and move forward.

Sunday, November 2, 2008

Norm Coleman has sunk to historic depths to smear Al Franken and make this election about something, anything other than his own record and the issues that affect the people of Minnesota.

But what Norm Coleman did yesterday was something else entirely, and you need to know the truth.

Here's the story: A Republican businessman in Texas by the name of Paul McKim filed a lawsuit this week against Nasser Kazeminy. Kazeminy is one of Norm Coleman's biggest donors and closest friends - he's the same man who flew Coleman on his private jet to vacations in the Bahamas and Paris.

Only a small portion of the lawsuit has anything to do with Norm Coleman - but the part that does is incredibly serious. McKim's sworn affidavit, since corroborated by a second lawsuit, describes an effort to funnel $100,000 to Senator Coleman.

So are the allegations true? We don't know. In fact, we at the campaign didn't know a thing about this lawsuit, had never heard of this company or Paul McKim, until we read about it in the newspaper.

Then came yesterday. Instead of answering these very serious allegations, Norm Coleman released the most dishonest ad of the year, blaming Al for the lawsuit.

That ad is up on TV right now. And it's a despicable lie. Al Franken had nothing to do with this lawsuit.

Norm Coleman, faced with sworn allegations of a conspiracy to funnel him improper payments, is trying to deflect blame by lying about Al Franken in a TV ad. No matter what candidate you support or what party you belong to, it is a sad day.

All of these are provided by the government and paid for by taxes. Taxes have been around forever. Federal income tax was adopted by Congress in 1861 and 1862 to pay for the Civil War. Even in 1862 the income tax was progressive (higher percentage on higher income).

So, here's the reason most everyday Americans don't understand taxes:

As of 2007, there are about 138 million taxpayers in the United States.[8] The Treasury Department in 2006 reported, based on Internal Revenue Service (IRS) data, the share of federal income taxes paid by taxpayers of various income levels. The data shows the progressive tax structure of the U.S. federal income tax system on individuals that reduces the tax incidence of people with smaller incomes, as they shift the incidence disproportionately to those with higher incomes - the top 0.1% of taxpayers by income pay 17.4% of federal income taxes (earning 9.1% of the income), the top 1% with gross income of $328,049 or more pay 36.9% (earning 19%), the top 5% with gross income of $137,056 or more pay 57.1% (earning 33.4%), and the bottom 50% with gross income of $30,122 or less pay 3.3% (earning 13.4%).[9][10] If the federal taxation rate is compared with the wealth distribution rate, the net wealth (not only income but also including real estate, cars, house, stocks, etc) distribution of the United States does almost coincide with the share of income tax - the top 1% pay 36.9% of federal tax (wealth 32.7%), the top 5% pay 57.1% (wealth 57.2%), top 10% pay 68% (wealth 69.8%), and the bottom 50% pay 3.3% (wealth 2.8%).[11]Other taxes in the United States with a less progressive structure or a regressive structure, and legal tax avoidance loopholes change the overall tax burden distribution. For example, the payroll tax system (FICA), a 12.4% Social Security tax on wages up to $97,500 and a 2.9% Medicare tax (a 15.3% total tax that is often split between employee and employer) is a regressive tax on income with no standard deduction or personal exemptions. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities states that three-fourths of U.S. taxpayers pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes.[12]The Tax Foundation has stated that the burden of the corporate income tax (a 15-39% tax) falls on customers and workers of the corporations, who are often not rich.[13] (Source Wikipeida - really it is less dry than the other sources)

Did you understand it all? I certainly didn't fully understand it, but whatever way you look at it Socialism is already here.

Here's the thing ~ when they talk about raising (or lowering) you taxes, you need to keep in mind that our taxes are progressive.

Progressivity in the income tax is accomplished mainly by establishing tax "brackets" - branches of income that are taxed at progressively higher rates. For example, for tax year 2006 an unmarried person with no dependents will pay 10% tax on the first $7,550 of taxable income. The next $23,100 (i.e. taxable income over $7,550, up to $30,650) is taxed at 15%. The next $43,550 of income is taxed at 25%. Additional brackets of 28%, 33%, and 35% apply to higher levels of income. So, if a person has $50,000 of taxable income, his next dollar of income earned will be taxed at 25% - this is referred to as "being in the 25% tax bracket," or more formally as having a marginal rate of 25%. However, the tax on $50,000 of taxable income figures to $9,058. This being 18% of $50,000, the taxpayer is referred to as having an effective tax rate of 18%.

Essentially, if person A makes $10,000 a year, and person B makes $50,000 a year, and person C makes $100,000 a year, all three of them pay the same amount of taxes on the first $10,000. Person B will be taxed on his remaining $40,000 at the next appropriate bracket. Person C will be taxed on his next $40,000 at the same rate as person B was, and now will be taxed on the remaining $50,000 at the next appropriate tax bracket.

With that being said, when the candidates talk about raising or lowering your taxes, you need to look at what tax brackets are being affected. It may impact you differently than you had first thought.

"In the simplest terms, McCain is going to cut everybody's taxes, but cut the very richest people's taxes most. Obama is going to cut everybody's taxes except the really rich. As the Tax Policy Center points out, both plans are lousy for the federal debt: Obama's would raise the debt by $2.9 trillion, McCain's by $4.2 trillion."

Shouldn't we consider how to get out of the National Debt before we talk about lowering taxes?

Corporate taxes are another thing entirely. The majority of corporations PAY NO INCOME TAX in the US.

In the United States, the federal corporate income rate for the year 2006 varies between 15 and 39% depending on taxable income. But since 1999, when Treasury announced the "check the box" system many corporations can elect to be treated as a pass-through entity, thereby skipping the entity level 35% tax and having all income pass through to the shareholders. This is the tax treatment that the much discussed "S" corporations receive; but now many more types of state-law corporations may avoid double taxation by "checking the box". Dividends are also subject to a lower rate of income tax in the United States. The U.S. corporate tax rate is ranked as the second highest statutory rate among the OECD countries (the U.S. average rate of 39.3 ranks just behind Japan's 39.5 and well above the OECD average of 28.7).[27]However, the U.S also has the greatest number of corporate tax loopholes of any OECD member,[28] allowing many corporations to achieve a lower effective tax rate than the published rates.

So, that doesn't prove the statement I made necessarily that corporations don't pay income taxes, does it? Guess who pays those taxes - YOU do! That's right Companies charge you, the consumer/customer/client, higher prices for the goods and services to pay those costs. So then would it be fair to say you are, essentially, being double taxed? And is this also Socialism?

Anyways, there is far too much about taxes to get too in depth. We'll leave that one to the economists. My main points are:

Socialism is already here, like it or not.

We should not be increasing the deficit even more to cut taxes - anyone's taxes

If taxes are cut on the Federal level, that burden gets shifted down to your state, county, and local levels anyways.

It is our responsibility as law abiding Americans to pay taxes - it is also our responsibility to keep our elected officials honest about how our taxes are being spent. You do this by paying attention, voting, and writing and calling your officials.

I can't believe we even have talk about this in this day and age. Just because a man's skin color may not be the same as others, it DOES NOT automatically make him a foreigner, a terrorist, or anything other than a HUMAN BEING! It really makes me wonder if Barack had light skin and a name like "Mike Smith"would this ever have been a discussion. Well for the haters here it is AGAIN:

There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.

Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.

No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawaii.

Here are some of the things I think and believe. Here are some of the things my heart tells me.

I believe that every time we do something that limits the rights of others, we make it that much easier for someone else to limit our own rights. Therefore, the best way to protect my own rights is for me to fight to protect the rights of others.

I believe that if the racial/ethnic/cultural group I happen to be a part of is some day to be a minority, then I ought to do everything I can to treat existing minorities well since my behavior might serve as an example of how I could be treated.

I believe that a society is ultimately judged by how it protects its weakest members.

I believe that we are all obligated to provide some form of voluntary, long-term service to our communities and that there are many ways that this can be done.

I believe that we should vigorously exercise each of our rights, even to voting in the most obscure local elections, so that no one can take away our rights by asserting that we never used them anyway.

I believe that while all of us are entitled to the rights and privileges we enjoy as citizens, very few of us have actually earned them and that we only have them by the good luck of having been born here. Therefore, those who suffer and struggle and fight to share in the benefits of our society may be more deserving of them than I am.

I believe that we should read banned books.

I believe that paying taxes is a responsibility to be fulfilled and not a hardship to be dodged.

I will support those who seek to expand the rights we all enjoy and not those who find it necessary to restrict our rights. I do not believe that we must destroy the Constitution in order to save it.http://www.roundrockjournal.com/?p=3025

I also believe.

I believe that we the people have a responsibility to leave this leave a better place for our children.

I believe in my family values. Hate and racism is not one of them.

I believe in fairness and equality.

I believe that the People should come before the Corporation.

I believe in the people that fought and died for our Constitutional rights, and I believe we need to uphold those rights.

I am not in the upper tax bracket - not even close, but if all of the things I believed in could happen based on my taxes, I willingly would pay 10 times the amount I do now.

I also believe that I have worked just as hard my whole life to get to where I am in life as those in the high tax brackets. I have worked every day of my life since I was 15. I was a teen mother. I moved away from home while a senior in high school. I went to school while working 2 jobs. I still graduated high school with high-honors with a one year old and our own place. I put my self through college, again while working two jobs and raising a baby graduated technical college again with honors. Still today (the baby is almost 16!) I work full time and also run my own business outside of being a mother, a wife, a gardener, etc. I have worked every single day of my life to get to where I am, and never once take any of it for granted, nor would I have changed any of it. Every struggle, every tear, every pride filled moment, all the good days, but especially the bad days have made me the person I am today.

Who decided that because I only make $60k a year means I don't work hard??? They need to take a walk in someone else's shoes.

WASHINGTON – A judge has ordered the Justice Department to produce White House memos that provide the legal basis for the Bush administration's post-Sept. 11 warrantless wiretapping program.

U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy Jr. signed an order Friday requiring the department to produce the memos by the White House legal counsel's office by Nov. 17. He said he will review the memos in private to determine if any information can be released publicly without violating attorney-client privilege or jeopardizing national security.

Kennedy issued his order in response to lawsuits by civil liberties groups in 2005 after news reports disclosed the wiretapping.

The department had argued that the memos were protected attorney-client communications and contain classified information.

But Kennedy said that the attorney-client argument was "too vague" and that he would have to look at the documents himself to determine if that argument is valid and also to see if there is information that can be released without endangering national security.

Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said Saturday the department is reviewing the opinion and will "respond appropriately in court."

Shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush authorized the National Security Agency to spy on calls between people in the U.S. and suspected terrorists abroad without obtaining court warrants. The administration said it needed to act more quickly than the court could and that the president had inherent authority under the Constitution to order warrantless domestic spying.

After the program was challenged in court, Bush last year put it under the supervision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, established in 1978 after the domestic spying scandals of the 1970s.

"We think just as a common sense matter the legal theories for the president's wiretap programs cannot be classified and should be available to the public," said Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, one of the groups seeking the memos.

"It's an important decision because up to this point the judge has relied on the government's assertion that it has done everything properly under the law and that it has disclosed everything it needs to disclose," Rotenberg said Saturday.

Amazon Video on Demand will provide a higher resolution version of the above stream for people with lots of bandwidth. It will be available in a few hours.

iTunes will make it easy for you to download "Slacker Uprising" on your iTunes, iPod, or Apple TV, and view it there or transmit it to your television. This way, the film can be portable as well as for home viewing. This will be available soon.

Hypernia is providing bandwidth and servers to host MPEG4 and DivX versions of "Slacker Uprising" online, so you can burn a DVD or download the film to watch on your computer, XBOX, or PS3.

Lycos is providing free streaming of the film and an on-demand version.

Stream it, download it, burn it now. It's the first time a major feature-length film is being released for free on the internet. You can be part of this historic moment by logging on now!

Do you need more proof after these last 8 years that the Republican party agenda does not have your health or welfare in mind? After the de-regulation of the financial industry has lead to 3 trillion dollars of our savings and retirement lost in the past month, President Bush is pushing in the eleventh hour to de-regulate corporate business - the impact on the environment and our health will be just as disastrous.

Before you vote on Tuesday, take a close look at McCain's voting record. He has indeed voted with Bush 90% of the time, and especially in areas concerning Corporations and his history of de-regulation.

The White House is working to enact a wide array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken government rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment, before President Bush leaves office in January.

The new rules would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era and could be difficult for his successor to undo. Some would ease or lift constraints on private industry, including power plants, mines and farms.

Those and other regulations would help clear obstacles to some commercial ocean-fishing activities, ease controls on emissions of pollutants that contribute to global warming, relax drinking-water standards and lift a key restriction on mountaintop coal mining.

Once such rules take effect, they typically can be undone only through a laborious new regulatory proceeding, including lengthy periods of public comment, drafting and mandated reanalysis.

"They want these rules to continue to have an impact long after they leave office," said Matthew Madia, a regulatory expert at OMB Watch, a nonprofit group critical of what it calls the Bush administration's penchant for deregulating in areas where industry wants more freedom. He called the coming deluge "a last-minute assault on the public . . . happening on multiple fronts."

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said: "This administration has taken extraordinary measures to avoid rushing regulations at the end of the term. And yes, we'd prefer our regulations stand for a very long time -- they're well reasoned and are being considered with the best interests of the nation in mind."

As many as 90 new regulations are in the works, and at least nine of them are considered "economically significant" because they impose costs or promote societal benefits that exceed $100 million annually. They include new rules governing employees who take family- and medical-related leaves, new standards for preventing or containing oil spills, and a simplified process for settling real estate transactions.

While it remains unclear how much the administration will be able to accomplish in the coming weeks, the last-minute rush appears to involve fewer regulations than Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton, approved at the end of his tenure.

In some cases, Bush's regulations reflect new interpretations of language in federal laws. In other cases, such as several new counterterrorism initiatives, they reflect new executive branch decisions in areas where Congress -- now out of session and focused on the elections -- left the president considerable discretion.

The burst of activity has made this a busy period for lobbyists who fear that industry views will hold less sway after the elections. The doors at the New Executive Office Building have been whirling with corporate officials and advisers pleading for relief or, in many cases, for hastened decision making.

According to the Office of Management and Budget's regulatory calendar, the commercial scallop-fishing industry came in two weeks ago to urge that proposed catch limits be eased, nearly bumping into National Mining Association officials making the case for easing rules meant to keep coal slurry waste out of Appalachian streams. A few days earlier, lawyers for kidney dialysis and biotechnology companies registered their complaints at the OMB about new Medicare reimbursement rules. Lobbyists for customs brokers complained about proposed counterterrorism rules that require the advance reporting of shipping data.

Bush's aides are acutely aware of the political risks of completing their regulatory work too late. On the afternoon of Bush's inauguration, Jan. 20, 2001, his chief of staff issued a government-wide memo that blocked the completion or implementation of regulations drafted in the waning days of the Clinton administration that had not yet taken legal effect.

"Through the end of the Clinton administration, we were working like crazy to get as many regulations out as possible," said Donald R. Arbuckle, who retired in 2006 after 25 years as an OMB official. "Then on Sunday, the day after the inauguration, OMB Director Mitch Daniels called me in and said, 'Let's pull back as many of these as we can.' "

Clinton's appointees wound up paying a heavy price for procrastination. Bush's team was able to withdraw 254 regulations that covered such matters as drug and airline safety, immigration and indoor air pollutants. After further review, many of the proposals were modified to reflect Republican policy ideals or scrapped altogether.

Seeking to avoid falling victim to such partisan tactics, White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten in May imposed a Nov. 1 government-wide deadline to finish major new regulations, "except in extraordinary circumstances."

That gives officials just a few more weeks to meet an effective Nov. 20 deadline for the publication of economically significant rules, which take legal effect only after a 60-day congressional comment period. Less important rules take effect after a 30-day period, creating a second deadline of Dec. 20.

OMB spokeswoman Jane Lee said that Bolten's memo was meant to emphasize the importance of "due diligence" in ensuring that late-term regulations are sound. "We will continue to embrace the thorough and high standards of the regulatory review process," she said.

As the deadlines near, the administration has begun to issue regulations of great interest to industry, including, in recent days, a rule that allows natural gas pipelines to operate at higher pressures and new Homeland Security rules that shift passenger security screening responsibilities from airlines to the federal government. The OMB also approved a new limit on airborne emissions of lead this month, acting under a court-imposed deadline.

Many of the rules that could be issued over the next few weeks would ease environmental regulations, according to sources familiar with administration deliberations.

A rule put forward by the National Marine Fisheries Service and now under final review by the OMB would lift a requirement that environmental impact statements be prepared for certain fisheries-management decisions and would give review authority to regional councils dominated by commercial and recreational fishing interests.

An Alaska commercial fishing source, granted anonymity so he could speak candidly about private conversations, said that senior administration officials promised to "get the rule done by the end of this month" and that the outcome would be a big improvement.

Lee Crockett of the Pew Charitable Trusts' Environment Group said the administration has received 194,000 public comments on the rule and protests from 80 members of Congress as well as 160 conservation groups. "This thing is fatally flawed" as well as "wildly unpopular," Crockett said.

Two other rules nearing completion would ease limits on pollution from power plants, a major energy industry goal for the past eight years that is strenuously opposed by Democratic lawmakers and environmental groups.

One rule, being pursued over some opposition within the Environmental Protection Agency, would allow current emissions at a power plant to match the highest levels produced by that plant, overturning a rule that more strictly limits such emission increases. According to the EPA's estimate, it would allow millions of tons of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually, worsening global warming.

A related regulation would ease limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants near national parks.

A third rule would allow increased emissions from oil refineries, chemical factories and other industrial plants with complex manufacturing operations.

These rules "will force Americans to choke on dirtier air for years to come, unless Congress or the new administration reverses these eleventh-hour abuses," said lawyer John Walke of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

But Scott H. Segal, a Washington lawyer and chief spokesman for the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, said that "bringing common sense to the Clean Air Act is the best way to enhance energy efficiency and pollution control." He said he is optimistic that the new rule will help keep citizens' lawsuits from obstructing new technologies.

Jonathan Shradar, an EPA spokesman, said that he could not discuss specifics but added that "we strive to protect human health and the environment." Any rule the agency completes, he said, "is more stringent than the previous one."